Recognizing that what we know doesn't happen to be true is always a bit disconcerting, Four4me. Uprooting our belief that we already know everything that needs knowing isn't easy.

I'm already a writer. Evidently, BL is a song writer. I don't know anything more than that about him, except that, as I told him in a private message after I came to understand his post on the Strange Experience thread, he's one smart cookie.

Oh i never said he wasn't smart in fact i said in previous post that i found some of his early post when he first joined to be very helpful. Even back then he used an extreme amount of words not pertaining particular to the topic of his thread. Any how i guess some people have to do that. I however i like to get straight to the point and not mix words that have nothing to do with the subject matter.

And i am pretty naive in that i believe most of what people tell me unless i know for sure that person isn't honest. Even then there might be half truth. I guess i'm getting softer in my old age cause i would have been a doubter to the bitter end and had to offer apologies.

everyone can afford to play 18 number full cover wheels to guarantee success anyway

Hi again, Paul.

I can't. Probably nobody in his right mind would. I'm having to go down to bare metal in my budget to buy the PB tickets I'm getting for the draw tonight, and it won't come close to covering the possibilities.

Fact is, as BL implied, you can refine it to a set of numbers/probabilities a lot smaller than the 20 he offered up. But the rub is that once you've done it, it's still the lottery. Any given draw, or series of draws can run sidewise to the way you figured. It's not going to work every draw. Hocking your jock in anticipation of it working THIS draw is a risky business and not one I'd recommend.

That was my one concern about BL posting the numbers yesterday. It could have gone the other way, him not hitting a single number. Then you'd have all lit into him, ripped him to shreds in the aftermath, believed him a fool, liar or worse.

One thing BL said on the Strange Experience thread is of prime importance (all of it is, but this is, particularly so within the context of this post). Relax. I know you won't believe this, but it's crucial to what you're trying to do actually working.

I do not share the disdain showered upon Biglooser on his sharing of his findings and info on "number selection'. It is entirely possible that he is justified in feeling that he has developed something that might lead to some lotto winnings.

In an odd sort of way I feel I can share Biglooser's optimism over his findings. I have found a way to build a "pool" of numbers to be further considered for selection.

Take a look at my "ticket" from the M.M April fools day drawing. I feel that it supports Biglooser's contention that it can be and likely will be done. I played 10 games (my budget is $10.00) from my 4.1.05 pool:

If his method of getting 4 and 5 numbers correct in the wheels all the time is possible it would be smart to wheel 18 numbers in 50 or 100 combinations each week and win consistently a lot of 5th and 4th prizes and perhaps a 3rd prize even.

I look forward to test his program once it's finished - IF it ever will be finished.

I read the strange experience thread but I dont do the god/religion thing, so it didnt mean a lot to me, I am still not convinced it will hit 6 - 9 times out of 10, but like I said, good luck to the guy if he can. it does makes me think what was the point in posting if he didnt plan on sharing his idea though ? first thing I did when I thought I had found something big with GH software was post what I had found, it turned out wrong in the end, but I still posted it.

Seems to me he already has the system finished enough for his own use. All putting it into easy software would do would be to make it easier for people who don't want to have to do any thinking and working on it themselves.

If, as BL says, his intention is to bankrupt the lottery systems (and I believe him when he says that's what he intends to do), there are a lot more imaginative and intriguing ways of doing it than by handing it out as a piece of software to a lot of people on this forum who've already been given the answers.

If he's going to bust the lotteries and give things away to people who don't believe in what he's saying enough to listen to him, why should he do it here? Fact is, this country's full of people who are as worthy of recieving his largesse as anyone on this board. Probably a lot of them need it a lot more severely than anyone here.

Fact is, most of the people here were hinting at, or actually saying some fairly nasty things about him this time yesterday. There's been some change in attitude in the last 12 hours, but even that could have gone a lot differently, as I've said in an earlier post, with him still having what he has, but with luck of the evening going just a bit differently. Today, instead of the posts on this thread looking forward to him saying more, they'd be dripping with insult and innuendo.

I wouldn't set my hopes too firmly on him handing you a piece of software that will save you going a step further and figuring out what he's saying to you, listening to him. This guy's a savvy person. Just because you've changed your tune, knowing he has something you want, he mightn't feel the need to hand you a full-grown pie. He's given you the ingredients, a pan and a stove to cook it on.

Guess it's just a matter of waiting to see what he's going to do if you refuse to come into the kitchen.

Yes I know. We have been tough on him, me included. But some of it he had it coming.

No, I don't expect him to hand over his program. If he want to create a software for his system it is natural to think he want money for it. I just hope the software will be tested well before coming on sale unlike some other software I know about AND get a reasonable price tag.

I wouldn't set my hopes too firmly on him handing you a piece of software that will save you going a step further and figuring out what he's saying to you, listening to him. This guy's a savvy person. Just because you've changed your tune

I have not changed my tune, my apology was for doubting him about those sets of numbers. im sure if it had gone the other way, you would have probably changed your tune though.

Feel free to keep right on being sure of that, Paul. You're sure of enough other things that are a greater hindrance for you to make what I might or mightn't have done a matter inconsiderable consequence. What I thought yesterday and the day before, what I think tomorrow isn't much worth giving a thought to.

Fact is, barring a few really miniscule changes we're the same people we were yesterday. If that's what we aspire to be, so be it.